Greg Maddux, Tom Glavine, Frank Thomas Elected To Hall Of Fame

Maddux, often referred to as "The Professor," won 355 games with a 3.16 ERA in 5,008 1/3 career innings. He averaged 6.1 K/9 (3,371 career strikeouts) and 1.8 BB/9 (999 career walks) over that time and captured four consecutive NL Cy Young Awards from 1992-95. He also fired 109 complete games, including 35 shutouts, and picked up 18 Gold Glove Awards as well. Baseball-Reference valued his career at 104.6 WAR, while Fangraphs had him at 113.9.

His longtime teammate, Glavine, won two NL Cy Young Awards (and had three other Top 3 finishes) en route to a career 3.54 ERA. Glavine won 305 games, striking out 2607 batters (5.3 K/9) against 1500 walks (3.1 BB/9) in 4,413 1/3 career innings. He completed 56 of his 682 career starts and totaled 25 shutouts along the way. Baseball-Reference pegs him at 74 WAR, while Fangraphs values his career at 64.3 WAR.

Thomas was one of the game's most feared power hitters for the majority of his 19-year career. "The Big Hurt" owns a lifetime .301/.419/.555 batting line with 521 homers and 1,704 RBIs. He won the American League MVP in 1993-94 and had four other Top 4 finishes in that voting. Thomas' OPS+ of 156 is tied with the great Willie Mays for the 19th-highest in Major League history, placing him one point ahead of Hank Aaron. In terms of WAR, Baseball-Reference has Thomas at 73.6 compared to Fangraphs' 72.4.

Falling painfully shy of enshrinement is Astros great Craig Biggio, who received 74.8 percent of the vote, meaning he was two votes shy of being elected. That should bode well for his future chances, and one would imagine that he is a lock for election in the coming years.

Also of note is Jack Morris, whose 61.5% vote count did not get him elected in his 15th and final time on the BBWAA ballot. Opinions have varied widely on Morris, whose 10-inning shutout in Game 7 of the 1991 World Series against the Braves is considered one of the greatest postseason performances in history. He will now have to wait until at least 2016 for another chance at the Hall of Fame, when the Veteran's Committee can vote on his fate.

Maddux's 97.2 percent vote count is overwhelming, but also means that he was left off of an incredible 16 ballots. It was thought that he could pass Tom Seaver for the greatest total ever, but Tom Terrific's mark of 98.8 percent still remains the top in Hall of Fame voting history. Mike Piazza (62.2 percent), Jeff Bagwell (54.3 percent) and Tim Raines (46.1 percent) were among the other top vote-getters. Click here for the full results, and congratulations from the MLBTR team to Maddux, Glavine and Thomas on the well-deserved elections.

Some do votes like that is a tip of the cap to someone they followed or wrote heavily about. It happens all the time. Like I said, writers will do strange things with their ballots just to get some acknowledgement for their obscure vote. Yesterday, a writer publicly spoke about not voting for Maddux and using his only vote for Morris.

And that writer should be stripped of his ‘right’ to vote. He said he won’t vote for any one in the steroid era, well he’s not going to have anyone to vote for soon so might as well just remove him from the equation all together next year.

What’s the point in even having a voting system if you’re going to strip the right to vote from those who don’t agree with your point of view. The writers can – and should – be able to do whatever they want with their votes.

This isn’t the fan vote, these guys are supposed to make legit educated votes. They all talk a big game about the integrity of the sport, well when they make these nonsensical votes they diminish the integrity of the sport’s greatest honor

Don’t complain about the guys that got voted that you don’t think belong. They were on the ballot so they were worth voting for. We should be complaining about the guys that sent in blank ballots or just voted for 1 guy on this stacked ballot. Diminishing the career of Jacque Jones is just mean.

And he isn’t in the Hall of Fame and won’t be on the ballot next year. It doesn’t hurt anyone that Jacque Jones got 1 vote including Biggio. Besides who says that vote would have went to Biggio or anyone in particular anyway. Maybe this voter just voted for 9 guys and would have voted for just 8 without Jones.

No that’s not the only criteria. There are plenty of guys that played for 10 years and were retired for 5 that were left off of this ballot. There is a long list of decent players such as Jose Cruz Jr., Geoff Jenkins, Jon Leiber, Matt Morris, Trot Nixon, Dave Roberts, Jose Vidro, Dmitri Young, and many more that were eligible for the ballot this year for the first time and were excluded. Getting on the ballot is a big accomplishment.

This from Baseball Reference: “A player is eligible for election to the Baseball Hall of Fame if satisfies the following criteria:The player must have competed in ten seasons. A single game counts as a “season” in the eyes of the Hall.
The player has been retired for at least five seasons. If a player comes back and plays in the major leagues, the clock restarts. The easiest way to figure out the rule is to add six to the last season the player was active. Therefore, players eligible in 2007 played their last game in 2001.
A screening committee must approve the player’s worthiness. Most players are given a token appearance on the ballot if they meet the ten year rule and they were a regular player for most of that time.”

So apparently a player can be excluded on the 10/5 thing, but this seems to indicate that it’s not common.

No problem, I research for a living…this is cake. I listed off the ones that were excluded in 2014 earlier in this thread. In 2013, guys such as Tony Batista, Mark Bellhorn, Juan Encarnacion, Mike Lieberthal, Mike Myers, Neifi Perez, Scott Spiezio, Jose Valentin, Bob Wickman, Preston Wilson, and Jaret Wright plus many others were left off.

Now they are not the greatest players of all time, but they were legitimate major league starters for at least 10 years each.

Here are the eligible players for 2015 that I got from the HOF website. About two thirds will not make the final ballot

I really hope they put Erstad on the ballot next year and he grabs a handful of votes. He’s the only player in MLB history to win a Gold Glove at more than one position. No, he’s not a Hall of Famer, but that’s a damn fine accomplishment worthy of some recognition.

No that’s not the only criteria. There are plenty of guys that played for 10 years and were retired for 5 that were left off of this ballot. There is a long list of decent players such as Jose Cruz Jr., Geoff Jenkins, Jon Leiber, Matt Morris, Trot Nixon, Dave Roberts, Jose Vidro, Dmitri Young, and many more that were eligible for the ballot this year for the first time and were excluded. Getting on the ballot is a big accomplishment.

That vote doesn’t mean the guy thought Jacque Jones was HoF-worthy. Typically, in cases like this, a writer who had a friendship with the guy will cast a vote for him out of respect and to make sure that he doesn’t go out with zero votes. We saw the same thing recently with BJ Surhoff.

Me, I save my rage for people not voting for people they should (SIXTEEN ballots let off Greg Maddux?!?!?) instead of getting worked up over meaningless symbolic votes for guys who are one and done anyway.

yeah but when you have a limited number of votes, casting a vote for a guy like Surhoff or Jones takes one vote away from guys who actually have had careers that are worthy of that vote. i’m not completely against the system, but in my eyes when you cast a vote for someone, you’re saying that you think they are worthy of the HOF.

I disagree to an extent. Biggio was a tremendous player, but he was never a player that was dominating the league. Missing the Hall of Fame is not a knock to anyone, because people that get into the Hall should be considered as legendary. I also think when you have Biggio and Piazza it’s not even close which one is a Hall of Famer and which one is flirting with the Hall of Fame.

I agree. He was never a “dominant” player (probably because he got hit every other pitch). However, he lost votes to players like Jacque Jones, Armando Benitez and J.T. Snow. That’s what I’m concerned with. Whoever honestly thinks those three are Hall of Famers needs to get Pete Rose’d from baseball.

You are wrong there, he was a dominating player, but at 2B. They have always said the magic number is 3000 hits and he has that. He was a all-star and 3 positions and has the most doubles as a 2B in history. U can not compare Biggio’s numbers to Piazza because he was not that type player. If you were just going by numbers there would be hardly no 2B or SS going into the HOF

You need to compare Piazza and Biggio when there is only one spot available for the Hall. Piazza dominating the catching position. You can argue that Piazza was one of the best catchers to ever play the game. Was Biggio ever the best player to play the positions he played in the history of the game? Biggio was a great player, but the fact that people believe he is an automatic Hall of Famer I don’t understand. The 3,000 hits you could simply argue that he was a compiler, which the Hall of Fame seems to favor over dominance. Someone like Albert Belle, who completely dominated the game when he played, would never have a chance at the Hall of Fame for many reasons. However, his shorter career was a display of dominance.

He is not the best catcher to play the game, Johnny Bench was. Piazza was a medicare catcher but great hitter. There were more than one spot available for the HOF so there was never just one spot? Glavine and Maddux made the HOF because they both deserved it. What 2B show be in the HOF then???

Who is looking at UZR for the HOF? The HOF is mostly about being stout offensively. Most of the defensive wizards are already in the HOF and you’d be hard pressed to put someone in now b/c of their defense if they are marginal elsewhere.

Vizquel has almost 2,900 career hits and 11 Gold Gloves. If you are talking about the best defensive shortstop in baseball history, he’s certainly in the argument. I don’t think he’ll be a first ballot guy for the same reason Biggio isn’t, but he deserves a spot in Cooperstown.

Only 1 HOF 2B has more HRs, only 5 have as many RBIs, only 1 has as many Runs, only 3 has as many SB, only 2 has as many hits, Biggio also has the most doubles of any 2B! Most of these 2B are players that had very long careers. All that being said Biggio might be one of the top 2B of all time. (I didn’t even get into the all-stars and gold gloves)

Ruben Sierra, Darren Oliver, Kenny Rogers. There’s a list with a ton of guys like that. Sometimes you don’t even have to be good to play that long. This guy Luke Sewell played 20 years and collected 3.8 bWAR for his career.

All-stars? Biggio played for 20 years and made the All-Star team only 7 times, which gives you an argument that he was not dominating the game for the majority of his career. Like I said, Biggio was a tremendous player, but not an immortal. The Hall of Fame has allowed too many players, and I think it should belong to the immortal players (including some of the steroid guys). Biggio is going to get in, but the fact that you can make a valid argument that he is or isn’t a Hall of Famer is a solid indicator of how Biggio was not a dominating player throughout his career. I think the players that get in should be without question Hall of Famers (like the guys that got in today and Mike Piazza).

I come to you with the same question, what 2B makes the HOF. His numbers are just as good as just about every 2B in the HOF and they almost ALL had very long careers too. The way you are explaining what u need to be a HOF’er there would be no 2B in the HOF. Hell, Jeter should have been gone 2 years ago but he is still playing and compiling stats, so is he a HOF’er?

Jeter and Biggio aren’t even in the same category. Jeter is a right-handed hitter with a career .312 average (Biggio isn’t even a .300 hitter), has been in the top ten MVP voting eight times (Biggio three), and has been one of the best post season baseball players in the history of the game (Biggio was a .234 hitter). All that has to count for something when talking about the HOF. What bothers me about making a case for Biggio, is that writers and others will argue “He did something only Rogers Hornsby did…” or some other gimmick stat. If you look at the numbers and the length of his career you can make an argument that Biggio is and is not a HOF’er which for me raises a red flag. Biggio will be in the HOF, but I think the HOF should be reserved for the guys that are no question HOF’ers (even though that is not the case).

Far from a compiler. Five years of a 130 OPS+ (Alomar had 6). The fact that you would criticize a guy for getting 3,060 hits makes no sense. If he had retired 2 years earlier, would that have helped? Still 2,800 hits.

Every hitter with 3,000 hits, save Rose (banned), Jeter (active), Biggio, and Palmeiro (steroids), is in the Hall of Fame. Contextually, as far as baseball history is concerned, Biggio is a lock.

The fact is that his argument is a very poor one. Career context does not trump the historical context associated with reaching that benchmark.

Tony Gwynn (and I’m a huge Gwynn fan) had only 81 more hits than Biggio over the same amount of years. That’s four hits per year. He wasn’t nearly the defender or baserunner that Biggio was, and he didn’t play a challenging position. He had less power than Biggio. Did Gwynn just collect his place in the Hall of Fame??

yes it is nearly a lock, but clearly it is not a lock. no one said they were locks to be in the first ballot or even the first few. i imagine he would’ve gotten in this year if the ballot wasn’t so stacked. that’s called context. whether you like it or not, career context does trump historical context. look at all the guys that were left off. for example look at how many guys have hit more than 60 homeruns in a season, and look at why sammy sosa isn’t in the HOF for doing it several times. look at Bonds. Clemens….that again is what we call context whether or not you agree with it.

yep me too. but clearly some do not agree and consider this part of career context. but it doesn’t really matter what everyone thinkgs because it’s been shown time and again that stat accumulation is not an automatic lock for the HOF.

Of the 28 player with 3,000+ hits, only 5 have careers of less than 20 years; 4 have fewer hits than Biggio. Of the 4 players with 20-year careers, Paul Waner has the most at 3,152; 92 more than Biggio (4.6 more hits/yr). Of the 6 players with 21-year careers, Honus Wagner (3,420) has the most. The least of the “21-year club,” George Brett, had 3,154. That’s 94 more than Biggio, or about a season’s worth of hitting. That’s just below Cal Ripkin’s 21-year total of 3,184; that’s also about a season’s worth of hitting a 124 more than Biggio. Ripken also had the lowest career batting average at .277. As far as I can tell, MANY in the 3,000 hit club could be said to have “compiled stats.” Since 1962, 17 of the 20 retired players with 3,000 hits went in on the first ballot. Who didn’t? Pete Rose (banned), Rafael Palmeiro (steroids), and Craig Biggio (Huh?)

It really diminishes the Hall in my opinion. If a guy with those stats + the all time home run king + the all time hit king + one of the best strikeout pitchers of all time don’t get in, then what is the Hall of Fame, really? It is clearly not a collection of the best players of all time. Let’s just kick out Ty Cobb, Cap Anson, Eddie Murray and a bunch of other guys and call it the Nice Guys Hall of Fame.

They both got in, so whatever. I’m tired of expending energy caring about the ‘conspiracy’ to not let anyone get in unanimously. At this point, that is what it is, and these dinosaurs aren’t going to move past it. As long as deserving people (like Thomas and Maddux) aren’t outright snubbed, it’s not a big deal.

Agreed. I know this is a long time down the road, but I’m curious to see what happens with Mike Trout’s voting. If he continues playing this way, I could see him getting 100% but it’s still not likely.

My greatest-fear-realized would be the Derek Jeter circle-jerk somehow culminating in him being the first ever unanimous selection. You can’t just pass over Wiliams, Mays, Ruth, Aaron, etc. just to give it to that chummy media pal that was vastly inferior to those guys. At this point, I think if they’ve decided no one can be unanimous the first time, then that’s just how it has to be. Giving it to a random future player is to give him something all the other all-time greats didn’t deserve (for whatever reason), so just…keep that going.

No way that happens. There is plenty of anti-Yankee sentiment out there to balance out the “Yankee love” mythology. There are people out there who won’t give that honor to him just for BEING “Mr. Yankee”

That’s not the same thing at all. Trout, through two years IN MAJOR LEAGUE BASEBALL, has done things virtually no one in the history of the game has done. At an age NO ONE has done it. You can project that and talk about that and speculate about that. You can talk about how he has actually performed, and what that looks like going forward. You can’t do that with someone who has literally zero performance. That’s not the same thing as a player who has never even signed with a major league team.

But sure, if you want to bring up Tanaka, have fun with your projection.

I think Tanaka is going to be a bust myself, so my projection is useless. I’m just saying that Fred Lynn started off his career like Mike Trout and then fell off rather quickly. Sure Trout could become a HOFer, but don’t assume just because he is great now that he will great in 5 years or after a 15 year career.

That’s my point though: they’re not. Trout beats him in virtually every statistical category, and in some cases (SB: 86 to 24, HR: 62 to 33) by a landslide, while also being a gold glove fielder, which Lynn most certainly was not. And the overall result of that outperformance, by WAR, is staggering: 20.8 vs. 12.5.

The whole idea is that Trout is doing what has never been done before. Pointing out another guy who had a really good start to his career isn’t a valid counterpoint, because he doesn’t come close.

And, for the umpteenth time, the original poster made clear that he was talking about an “if they continue…” pace, not an argument for the guy right now. And Trout, more than any other player in the game right now, has the most valid “if they continue…” argument to be made. That’s why he said it. Move on.

First off, don’t ever tell me to move on. You are not the internet policeman.

Secondly, Fred Lynn won the MVP in his rookie year…Trout did not. But seriously, They are similar, not in statistics, but in 2 year hype. Fred Lynn was called a future Hall of Famer early on although you are probably way too young to know that.

Next, there is no such thing as “the most valid” if they continue argument. If there was it wouldn’t be a two year “veteran” anyway. It would be someone like Miguel Cabrera, Prince Fielder or Justin Verlander that has been around for several years.

Technically you could go 24-0 with a 14.00 ERA as well, but that’s not likely to happen either. Technically you could have an OBP of .500 and not score a single run or drive in a single run, but that’s not likely either.

Joe DiMaggio only got 88%…on his 4th ballot. Rogers Hornsby only got 78% to get in. Duke Snider didn’t get in until his 13th year on the ballot. Jackie Robinson only got 77.5% of the vote. These percentages really mean nothing. Frank Thomas IS a Hall of Famer. The rest is just meaningless.

Biggio missed it by two votes. Yet People voted for Gagne, Jacque Jones and Armando Benitez. Pretty sad. Even if you are not an Astro fan you have to feel bad for him 74.8% of the votes and can’t use the excuse that 10 votes were not enough.

But if you’re not an Astro fan you probably didnt see enough of him to know one way or another. His career stats are eye-popping, but he played in an area of the country where most baseball people aren’t. Theres probably four times as many BBWAA eligible HOF voters in New York City as in all the Southwest.

The point I was making is that the person I was responding to (FOmeOLS) asked if Maddux ever had a bad game. I’m not disputing the guy had a great career. It’s like asking did Mariano Rivera ever blow a save.

By game score, his worst game (game score of 5) was in 1988 as a 22 YO against Phillies: 2.1 innings and 8 runs with only 2 Ks. If you ignore that, worst game (game score of 8) is as a 33 YO against cardinals where he gave up 8 runs while pitching 4.1 innings with 2 Ks and 1 walk or when marlins got him for 9 runs (7 earned) in 2 innings.

And in other sad news – Jacque Jones, Armando Benitez, and Kenny Rogers all got a vote. In a year in which many of the BBWAA members were hopeful that in the near future, the ballots would be extended to maybe 15-20 names

Didn’t hear it, but personality aside he was WAAY more dominant than Glavine who worked the corner away with weak sauce, if he didn’t get that call from the ump he was toast, and didn’t go complete games or have huge shut down performances in the World Series.

He’s got -0- reason to complain. Better SP than him have been bypassed for YEARS.. Jim Kaat, who didn’t have the luxury of playing on many winning teams being my main guy. Curt Schilling, better numbers, especially post season, but Jimmy Kaat, an iron man is the guy I will always bring up when people who deserve to be there are not, not mediocre starters like Morris.

175 complete games and 28 shutouts is a little better than mediocre. He also has one of the greatest starts in World Series history with his 10-inning shutout in game 7 of the ’91 World Series…..which will most likely never happen again!! I agree with you about Jim Kaat too. A workhorse who also ate up a lot of innings in his career!!

My point was that he was better than “mediocre”. There are quite a few “question mark” type players in the Hall of Fame!! It is not the Hall of the Elite anymore. 61% saw his career as being worthy, so that is a little better than mediocre:)

Want to try and put this into words, cause he (Morris) did have one point that I agree with there.

When Morris was pitching? There was not all these statistics many of the youngsters that I call these people worship so vigilantly and treat as if they are the end all to how good/bad a player is. That was his point and I kind of agree with him there.

I grew up in an A ball town, was at the park every day, knew the players, manager, hung around with some scouts and watched what they did. They didn’t track fancy numbers.. They watched what the kids did. Why? There was no fancy stats in the early 60’s thru the late 80’s and early 90’s.

Scouts didn’t have radar guns in the early 60’s. They grabbed a seat and watched the game. How the pitcher handled himself out on the mound.

One can say times have changed (they have) but Morris was saying times have changed between when he played and now. Don’t judge him from “now” players to how they were then. I still don’t think he belongs, but that was what he was saying is my 2c.

All the attention directed at the Biggio shortcoming, but the Piazza snub to me is the most egregious. Greatest hitting catcher of all time in most categories, and he still can’t catch a break. Biggio still deserves to be in, but at the very least you can argue that he’s the weakest of the 3,000 hit club members.

There’s a big difference. Peralta was actually caught in the Biogenesis situation. Piazza has never been caught and he also said he has never taken steroids in his book. Of course, there will still be people saying that you can’t just take his word out of a book. Others will say if you let the players of the steroid era that could have possibly been a part, then you’d have to let Rose, Strawberry, Gooden etc. in. Yet, being the top hitter at the position of catcher is something pretty extraordinary. First, it’s supposed to be a defensive position, yet he put up monster numbers. Second, to be in a category of the top at a position that included Berra, Bench, Munson, Carter, Fisk and more, then that’s pretty special. I really do hope that one day Piazza makes it into the Hall. I also think that Biggio deserved it, too. He put up numbers at a position not known for his type of offensive numbers, and he too should be awarded for that. Get em next year.

Not a big issue for me but it is just common sense that if there are less teams, the better the pitchers will be. I am not going to take the time to look, but were homeruns, average, slugging etc. up during that time than from the 80’s? If so, then it did make a difference. Besides, I said it was a small part.

Good riddance to Jack Morris’ presence on the ballot. The veteran’s committee might push him in some day, but no one sporting a 4ERA needs to be finding their way in just because they won kind of a lot of games. 32nd all time in strikeouts, but 295th in K/9. He pitched a long time, and was a solid starter for most of it and an ace for part of it. But the end result was a career long on innings, and short on outright dominance.

For everything we’ve been through losing 100 games each of the last 3 years, this would have been great to finally have a Hall of Famer. Literally sick to my stomach right now that Biggio didn’t get it.

The biggest reason is everyone trying to be sanctimonious about who they elect. Bonds and Clemens should have gone in in 2013. Whether you like them or not, they are among the best of all time and there is no drug that will make you THAT good. Otherwise everyone would have been that good. Now those two names are clogging the ballot probably for the next 15 years.

The problem is you’ll never be able to prove what they would have done if they didn’t take steroids. Bonds would never have even sniffed Aaron’s record without it. Clemens was no longer dominant until he started using PED’s.
Bonds to me is the more puzzling player because even without the PED’s he was on his way to the HOF. But then his ego couldn”t handle all the attention other guys were getting so he decided to turn himself into a cheater.

I think Smoltz will fall short next year and Biggio sneaks in. Don’t get me wrong, i think he is a Hall of Famer, but he was usually a clear #3 to Maddux and Glavine in Atlanta and he is a clear #3 to Randy and Pedro on the 2015 ballot.

Possible… I wonder if next year will be the year that more players are voted in than have been in quite some time. If the voters stick with some unspoken “only vote in three or four” players, some worthy guys will get squeezed again, no doubt.

Probably not next year , but 2016 looks like Griffey and the others. Trevor Hoffman is also on that ballot, but I see him as an eventually he gets in type guy. I am just guessing but I will put forth what I think

unless the culture of these voters changes drastically by then, i see Pudge not getting in in 2017. whether you agree or not, there’s a pretty widespread belief he was a user as well and i think the votes will reflect that.

right but a lot of players haven’t taken the heat until this ballot comes out. look at guys like bagwell, piazza, etc. none of them took the heat like bonds and clemens yet they are clearly being punished for suspicion.

Very difficult to argue any of that, and if your predictions come to light, those are all excellent induction classes. Not sure on Tim Raines, regrettably; I’d vote him in. I’ll be interested to see his support next year, if it rises or falls. I agree that Hoffman will be an “eventually” guy, which seems to happen to most relievers; even with his stats, he might be later than even your 2018 or 2019 prediction. The obvious exception to relievers being elected should be Rivera, another case of “why WOULDN’T you vote the guy in first ballot?”

The logjam isn’t going away any time soon. Randy Johnson, Pedro Martinez, John Smoltz, and Gary Sheffield will be on the ballot for the first time next year, with Ken Griffey Jr., Trevor Hoffman, and Billy Wagner joining the year after, and Vlad Guerrero, Manny Ramirez, and Pudge Rodriguez after that. Personally, I think that Biggio, Bagwell, Piazza, Raines, Martinez, Smith, McGriff, Kent, Trammell, Schilling, and Mussina all belong in the Hall of Fame, but I fear that many of them don’t even have a chance.

You have almost the exact same thought process as me. (I’m not so sure on Smith and want Larry Walker in). I really hope these guys get a fair chance, but with the way it is set up right now these guys are victims of the BBWAA

They will probably fix the logjam the same they fixed it in the 1950s, when the Veteran’s Committee was electing 3-4 guys per year because no one wanted to elect anyone to the Hall for several years. Go to Baseball Reference and look up the 1945 Hall of Fame vote. The top 33 names on the 95 player ballot eventually became HOFers and probably another 30 after that, but 0 were voted in in 1945 or 1946.

The: Sandy Koufax, of the Tom Seaver, of the Roger Clemens, of the Greg Maddux, of the Pedro Martinez of their times… Now Is it Clayton Kershaw? There really hasn’t been a dominant force along those lines to me.

Verlander is probably closest; Kershaw has to keep it up for the better part of the decade–no easy feat for a hardthrowing pitcher. Halladay only has 203 career wins and 2,117 K’s. Not that it should matter but it does.

I’m too young to have actually seen Koufax or Seaver, but they were certainly masters as well. I personally rule out Clemens b/c of steroids and the fact that his personality is so unlikable (to say the least). Pedro was flat out dominant but the end of his career was somewhat anticlimactic IMO.

I will never forget watching Maddux dissect his way through a lineup, it was spectacular. Part of me died a little when he went to ATL. The icing on the cake is that he’s the best defender ever at his position too.

I don’t think I’ll ever understand this process. If a guy is a HOF’er then he is…why does it matter how many people get in at the same time? And if people have to debate about whether he belongs or not then he probably doesn’t belong. It’s supposed to be for the elite of the elite not the pretty good player who played for 20 years to pad his stats.

Where have you been? The Hall of Fame has always been the guys that play a long time to “pad his stats.” I also can’t stand that phrase. It’s like people are punishing players for longevity. I’d much rather have Craig Biggio over the likes of a Don Mattingly or an Albert Belle. Those two guys were both dominant and elite for a short time, but didn’t stay around to “pad their stats.” The most ability in any sport is availability and Biggio was always there.

Oh I’m not even talking Biggio here, that was just a general statement. I think Biggio belongs in HOF. I was more talking about why it takes guys 5 tries to get in. Shouldn’t it be obvious if he belongs there or not? But to your point, does that mean someone like Jaime Moyer deserves to get in? If he made it to 300 wins because he played 40 years should that make him a HOF’er?

In my opinion yes. If you have the longevity to play MLB at a high enough level for long enough to accumulate those stats then you deserve recognition. No one is going to keep someone on their roster as a charity case, If Moyer is good enough to remain in the big leagues and can still win 40+ games or whatever he needs to get, then yes he does deserve to go into the HOF.

I guess i get your point, it’s just not what my vision is for the HOF. I think longevity is a factor but Moyer was never a great pitcher. Very serviceable, solid guy in the rotation for many years but never a dominant force. Shoot, Jesse Orosco pitched 24 yrs in the league and I don’t think anyone is upset that he’s not in. Except maybe Jesse…I guess that is part of the problem. What is the criteria for being inducted?

I understand what you are saying and a (very) small part of me thinks Jesse Orosco should be remembered. He is one of the best middle relievers of all time and he was a closer for a few years. However, Jamie Moyer was not hanging on as a LOOGY like Orosco either. He was a quality starting pitcher toward the end of his career, moreso than when he was in his 20s. I don’t think Moyer is a Hall of Famer, but if he had won 40 more games throughout his career then he probably would be on the level of a Don Sutton or Phil Niekro.

I like Frank Thomas and no dig on him as a feared hitter cause he crushed balls, but him getting in over Edgar is a little sad when he spent just about as much of his time as a DH as Edgar did. Edgar played the field early in his career too from 87 – 94 he was on the field almost as much as Thomas from 90 – 98. The rest of the time they both had single or double digits in the field (mostly for interleague play).

His HRs were higher, but the other numbers are about on par or better for Edgar. The point is that they are both basically DHs and the writers, for about 5 years now, have snubbed Edgar because he was a DH.

Actually Thomas did not play most of his career in a hitter friendly park, especially in the 90’s when then the new Comiskey park was a pitchers park and not a hitters park. They moved the fences in 2000. Thomas’ best years and most dominating years were in the 90’s. He put up numbers that only Ruth and Mel Ott compared to during that time. Thomas was simply a better hitter than Edgar was the most dominating hitter the game had seen in over 50 years.

I also think that Frank Thomas’ strong stance against steroids in baseball had something to do with his selection; the voters are, with good reason, very anti-PED and Thomas was the only player who voluntarily spoke out against steroids during the Mitchel Report investigation.

Like I said, I like Frank, he’s a great player but for 5 years Edgar’s been snubbed because he played primarily at DH and Frank got a lot more time to shine by playing primarily as DH too after the 1997/1998 season. Frank SHOULD be a HOFer and Im glad he got the nod today, but Edgar should have at least gone in years ago or at least in 2013 when NO ONE was voted in by the BBWAA. Just sayin Edgar shouldnt stay marred by being a DH like the BBWAA are shunning him for.

I was advocating that Edgar should get the same “look” that Thomas did; The BBWAA is not giving Edgar credit for since they say he was primarily a DH. Had Frank not played as DH after 1997, his numbers would still be good but not as staggering.

I know, and i don’t disagree but fact remains is that not only was Thomas a superior hitter, the perception was that he was as well. Honestly I think that’s what it really comes down is that a lot of people still perceive Thomas as a 1B.

Frank Thomas won 2 MVP’s (should have won a 3rd in 2000), is 14th all time in OPS, 11th in career walks, 18th all time in home runs. Martinez was a very, very good player, but without 500+ home runs it’s tough to put a 1b/dh into the hall

I would agree with you here, except for the fact that the hall of fame has let in players who were good/very good players. If the HOF only elected the best of the best than that is a different story. With players like Jim Rice, etc., getting in Edgar should definitely be in the HOF or at the very least have more than 25% of the vote…..

I think the (relatively speaking) low home run total is what is keeping Martinez out. 309 just doesn’t scream hall of famer to the voters. He might get in someday, but having only one 30+ home run season hurts when you spent the majority of games as a hitter

I see where you are coming from but in my mind a good hitter is not just one who hits a lot of home runs. I mean Edgar had a 300+/400+/900+ splash line and to my knowledge everyone with a 300/400/900 splash line is in the HOF. Also his OPS+ is better than many HOFers…

The classics worked much better for the time. Pitcher wins were very important in from around 1993 and before because pitchers routinely pitched into the late innings and completed 10+ games per year. Wins mattered a lot more then because it did show how effective a pitcher was. Now with most teams using 6+ pitchers a game, wins are more sporadic and spread around and are becoming somewhat of a useless stat. But they haven’t always been useless.

Throw out the old elected guys.. The Ray Schalk types that who knows why/how got elected..

Lets focus on why/how Tim Raines, Dwight Evans, Orlando Cepeda as hitters are not in the HOF, yet we have people every few years make it that put up less numbers than any of those.

Same with Lee Smith. He *had* the all time Save record when he retired, it easier to play until you break a record, but you go out on top like he did?? No respect for the guy he was and he was as good as any, including Gossage who played far less time.. But of course being a NYY didn’t hurt his chances any.

Jim Kaat I mentioned earlier has been off the ballot for years, he will only get a chance with the old timers committee now.

To tell you how much the 3,000 hit club clouds people’s judgment: Jeff Kent got 15% of the vote, and Biggio 74%. And, quite frankly, Kent was the better hitter, plain and simple. Albeit he had a shorter career, but he is absolutely in the same conversation. And certainly not worth ONE-FIFTH the consideration for the HoF.

The 3000 hit club means something. It always has and (should) always will. Getting 3,000 hits means you were a very good player for a very long time. That is an average of 200 hits per season for 15 years or 150 hits for 20 years. No matter how you get it, there is not one player that has gotten 3000 hits that shouldn’t be in the Hall of Fame, including Pete Rose. The 500 home run number has been tainted forever, but the 3000 hit mark and the 300 win mark should stand forever.

Why is the 500 home run mark tainted and yet the 3k hit mark and 300 wins isn’t? Steroids didn’t just help inflate power numbers but also helped players recover faster from various injuries and get back on the field. 3k hits and 300 wins are both longevity type of accomplishments and steroids could have definitely helped in one achieving them….

Because guys were getting 50+ home runs a season, but weren’t getting 30 wins or 300 hits per season. Steroids does the opposite regarding longevity. It creates nagging injuries as you get older. Look at ARod who was just about guaranteed to break Bonds’ record three years ago and now can barely walk.

The problem with milestones is that they cloud perspectives: Is Fred McGriff really VASTLY inferior to Eddie Murray (or even not deserving while Murray is) just because Murray hit 504 homers and McGriff only 493? Like I said, Biggio deserves to be in, but Kent does, too. And while he didn’t play as long (or as far past his prime, mind you) as Biggio did to get those milestones, he was every bit the hitter during his career.

It may not have come across, but I do actually agree with you. My point was that there still is something special about the 3000 hit club. I don’t think that people that don’t make it shouldn’t get in. I think people that do make it deserve special attention for that difficult accomplishment. And I totally agree that McGriff and, to a lesser extent, Kent should get in along with Walker, Trammell, and several others that probably won’t ever get in.

I agree with u. Besides Rose the only other 3000 hit members not in are Biggio, Palmeiro who was a juicer and is now officially off the ballot with 4% of the vote, and Jeter who will be in first ballot in about 7 or 8 yrs when he’s eligible.

I think Palmeiro should get in as well. Sure he is very unlikable, but this isn’t a vote for class president. It is a vote for the best baseball players of all time and he was one. Albeit one with a disclaimer.

What amazes me is the fact that the baseball writers have the hubris to have taken it upon themselves to punish Palmeiro while Congress did not punish him. I’d like all the HOF voters to both take a drug test and supply their permanent school records. Any that are found on illegal drugs of any kind or cheated on a test in school should be banned from voting ever again.

I wonder if some voters vote so blatantly wrong just because they want to see change. I’m not talking about guys like Ken Gurnick and Maury Chass. I’m not even referring to anyone specific. I just wonder if certain voters are doing it on purpose. What person, with the facts and knowledge at hand today would not vote for Greg Maddux? Have to think someone is using their right NOT to vote so a new process can be implemented. 16 people didn’t vote for him. That is so unthinkable to me.

I don’t understand how Glavine makes it and Mussina isn’t even that close to getting in. Only thing Glavine really has on Mussina is wins, ERA (slightly) and IP. Otherwise Mussina has more SO, less walks, higher ERA+, higher WAR, etc. Just looking at the numbers Mussina was the better pitcher throughout his career…
In my opinion a lot of these voters need to get their right to vote on the hall of fame revoked…
Edgar and Frank Thomas are also close comparatives. Now don’t get me wrong here Frank Thomas was the better player and hitter (just look at the stats) but there is no way that the difference between the two should have been that high. I mean Thomas received over 80% and Edgar is below 30%?
Case could also be made that Kent was a better player than Biggio…..Ehhh I guess I will never really understand the MLB Hall of Fame voters.
BTW because they messed up in not giving Babe Ruth, Hank Aaron, Cy Young, etc., an unanimous selection to the Hall of Fame doesn’t mean they shouldn’t have given it to Maddux….I would love to hear the arguments from anyone who didn’t have Maddux on their ballots….

I am not saying that Edgar was the better player just that he is comparable. They have similar numbers in hits, OPS+, OPS, doubles. Sure Thomas has the edge in HR’s/RBI’s. The 40 point difference in OPS is huge when you factor in an 18 year career. Likewise is the 9 point difference in OPS+.
That said there is no way that Thomas should have gotten over 80% of the vote and Edgar under 30%….

Thomas is #14 all time in career OPS (Martinez is 33rd), 11th all time in walks, has 2 MVP’s (should have won 3), 521 HR vs 309 is a HUGE gap as well, Thomas is a career .555 SLG% vs Martinez .515 is dramatically lopsided

Are they comparable? Yes, but Thomas is better in every single statistical category except career average (.301 vs .312).

Well the 2000 MVP should have been Pedro Martinez to be honest or Carlos Delgado (both had better years than Frank Thomas or Giambi). That said Edgar should have won the 1995 MVP award. Also 33rd all time in OPS should make him a HOF type of player along with an OPS+ that ranks 41st should put him on a lot more ballots than what he is currently on. Also HR numbers should not define how good of a hitter Edgar was. The fact that everyone with a 300/400/900 splash line (that I am aware of) is in the HOF….

Also I think that with Thomas on the ballot now it would be tough for voters to put him in since Thomas boasts better career numbers. He was a great hitter, but realistically he needs another 191 home runs to solidify his case

Apparently Lebatard claims he gave them the vote for free to show that the process is a joke. I refuse to believe he didn’t take money for it but I will admit I do hate Lebatard almost as much as Jim Rome.

I can only imagine what would have been if Griffey wasn’t slowed down by injuries. I am excited for Pedro who in my opinion had the greatest single season for a pitcher in 2000. Plus the greatest 4 year span ever? 97-2000. Would have won 4 Cy Young awards in a row if not for Clemens.

You have to remember that a lot of people know who took steroids and who didn’t even if it is not “public” information. So some former teammate goes off the record and tells you he knows Bagwell juiced you can’t publish it because you can be sued, but it doesn’t change the fact that you know he did it (if you believe the source to be truthful). All I am saying is that for guys like him not to get in there has to be an aweful lot of “behind the scenes” talk amongst voters that he was a user and a cheater.

Maybe my homer goggles are strapped too tight here but Moose getting only 20% is a joke. He’s superior to Jack Morris in pretty much every way and very comparable to Schilling and Glavine, even better in some ways. If my favorite pitcher ever misses out just because of his awful luck and never getting a ring, I’ll be steamed.

Mussina was a good pitcher, who often pitched for excellent teams. But possessing above-average talent and the fortune to play with high-caliber teammates does not qualify a player as a Hall of Famer.

Mussina’s career 3.68 ERA would be the third highest among Hall of Famers. His lone 20-win season came at age 39 for a non-playoff team.

And there’s this: Mussina is a study in “almost.”

He almost won a World Series in 2001, but didn’t. He almost pitched a perfect game in 2001, but didn’t. He almost won the Cy Young in 1999, but didn’t.

He led the AL in a few categories in 1995, including wins (19), shutouts (4) and walks per nine innings (2.0). But the only time he led the league in any category after that was in games started in 1996 (36) and innings pitched in 2000 (237.2). Notice, his “dominant period” ends in 2000. But he hung on for eight more seasons, pitching for an explosive Yankees team that helped him pile up 123 wins in eight seasons.

His postseason record was 7-8. In three World Series games, when his team needed him the most, he was 1-1 with a 3.00 ERA.

I don’t care about pitching wins, and neither should any serious baseball fan. For a prime example of why, look at his performance in Game 6 of the 1997 ALCS where the Birds lost and got eliminated: 8 IP, 1 H, 2 BB, 10 K, 0 R. Guess he just wasn’t good enough, eh?

His ERA might be high compared to the averaged HOFer but he also played through all of what was probably the toughest time for pitchers in MLB history. To pitch as well as he did in that time period is exceptional.

I hate when one player is criticized for something his TEAM failed to do like winning in the postseason, especially a SP. He can only go out there every four days or whatever and no matter how good he is, he’s only one small part of a larger machine that needs almost every part working. It drives me nuts that in recent years you can only win an MVP if your team makes the playoffs (see: Cabrera over Trout, Verlander over Ellsbury, etc.) It just shouldn’t be like that. You can be the best player in the league even if you’re on a subpar team.

actually serious baseball fans do care. just because it’s not a great stat doesn’t mean it should be ignored altogether. the stats combined tell a whole story. like it or not, it’s a team sport and the point is to win, not accumulate stats. ignoring his stats is just as bad as not looking at the context of those stats.

Anyone who has a HoF vote and seriously factors in Wins as a major category should immediately lose their ability to vote. Mussina had NO control over his teams offense or defense or the era he played in. All he could do is go out and pitch to the batters he faced.

Since ERA is so fraught with contextual issues let’s use something that compares the pitcher to the ERA and competition they played in … ERA- (lower is better). Below are stats for Mussina and a few other no doubt HoF pitchers:

Player A had the shortest career. He was middle of the pack with his contextual ERA and K’s. He had excellent control. Drysdale was elected to the HoF in 1984.

Player B had the longest career. Big points on throwing 5000+ innings. Worst contextual ERA but strong K and BB numbers. Steve Carlton was elected into the HoF with 96% of the voters supporting him 1994.

Player C was solid across the board. Great contextual ERA, a ton of innings, strong K and BB numbers. Tom Seaver was elected in 1992 with 98% of the voters supporting him.

Player D was a group leader in K9. He was 2nd in K’s despite pitching less innings than everyone but Drysdale. His contextual ERA is just behind Seaver. He also had the best control of the bunch. His KBB ratio is absurdly good. Mike Mussina received support on 20% of the ballots.

Player E had the 2nd worst contextual ERA. He pitched a ton of innings but was poor when it came to K’s. His KBB ratio ranked near the bottom for this group but somehow Glavine managed to be named on nearly 92% of the ballots.

Finally we have Player F. Tied with Seaver for the best contextual ERA. A mixture of decent longevity and pedestrian K and BB ratios. Jim Palmer walked into the HoF in 1990 with 93% of the vote.

In this group I would rank them as Seaver 1st, Carlton/Mussina/Palmer are duking it out for 2nd/3rd/4th, Drysdale at 5th and Glavine at 6th.

“he also played through all of what was probably the toughest time for pitchers in MLB history” which is what makes Maddux, Glavine and Pedro so much more remarkable. Pitching in the same era no way is Mussina even close to their level.

Mainly because Glavine had some outstanding seasons that Mussina can’t compare to. Glavine won two Cy Youngs and had two 2nd places finishes and two 3rd place finishes. Mussina finished 2nd one time and he has a 3.50 era that year. Mussina was good but not HOF worthy in my opinion.

I’m not sure how you can leave a player like Maddux off of your ballot, except to try to prevent someone from getting a unanimous election (which is… lame – what is wrong with acknowledging one of the best players as such?). Did 16 people really not think he was HoF material? I am dubious.

They possibly left him off the ballot because they wanted to vote for 11 guys and figured that Maddux would get in without their vote, but maybe a guy like Larry Walker or Alan Trammell needed that vote more to stay on the ballot and maybe get elected in a year when the ballot is not so stacked. It’s what I would have done.

Then they should change the 10 vote limit. Imagine a scenario (albeit an unlikely one ) where the majority of the writers agreed with you and left off Maddux and his induction eligibility to preserve the voting rights of a borderline Trammell or Walker.

To the voters: Someone should be able to ask the questions. What did Maddux fall short of? If you listed players on your ballot, are they MORE deserving of a vote than Maddux? Are you such a big Tom Seaver fan that you want him to have that voting “record” forever? If you are in a selected position to vote on this you should be in a position to answer the questions that come with it. It’s not like politics where everyone of age can vote. You are selected from a group of thousands for this privilege. If Maddux’s accomplishments don’t scream HOF then I’m not sure what does. If you think he was on steroids tell me one thing that makes you think that? Other than a few “as you get older” pounds, he looked the same on his rookie card as he did when he retired. Stats+awards+character+class+image+winner=unanimous. You can always win more, no one has ever won EVERYTIME but I can’t think of anything he DIDN’T accomplish….and I’m a Phillies fan who had to watch him pitch against us 61 times!! Unless you remember Warren Spahn, there is no other pitcher in you lifetime that won more games than Maddux. At some point winning baseball games has to be worth something!

So, if Biggio didn’t get in there this year, why would he get in next year? If 25.2% didn’t think that he was deserving of the HOF this year, why would they change their mind for next year? HOF voting is probably the worst thing about baseball.

Because voters are weird like that, they won’t vote for a certain ballplayer until a few years on the ballot. They think they are sending messages about what level of Hall of Famer each candidate is to them.

But that still means that they thought there were 7 other players who should get in ahead of Biggio. And there will be more great players on there again next year. But next year, Biggio will top 90% anyway, because the HOF voting is ridiculous like that.

So Biggio missed it by .2% but Armando Benitez and Jacque Jones received votes…what a travesty this voting system is. Plus I think Schilling deserved more than what he got, I heard a good argument on the radio today comparing his numbers to Glavine. It will be interesting to see what % Pedro gets next year.

Not sure how it works but I assume every player gets to be on the ballot since Mike Timlin was there? But maybe that is the issue, they should have a vote prior to this one on who should be on the ballot. That way you would ideally get rid of the Armando Benitezes and Jacque Joneses.

There were actually 36 players left off the ballot this year including Jose Cruz Jr, Geoff Jenkins, Matt Morris, Trot Nixon, Dave Roberts, and Jose Vidro. Not that any of them should be in the Hall, but they were solid starters for over a decade in MLB.

So Biggio missed it by .2% but Armando Benitez and Jacque Jones received votes…what a travesty this voting system is. Plus I think Schilling deserved more than what he got, I heard a good argument on the radio today comparing his numbers to Glavine. It will be interesting to see what % Pedro gets next year.

The Baseball Hall of Fame is and will always be a joke when those selected are voted on by people who have never played 1 inning….but they sure have watched a lot of free ball. And you know that none of those self righteous “writers” hold no grudges against any player or players who they have probably never met. It’s been suggested that living members of the Hall should get a vote and I’d be all for that…but until something is changed my path will never darken a Cooperstown doorway – pfffffffffft!

I’m looking at Jack Morris’ numbers and I don’t get the support. His traditional “triple crown” numbers dont look great and his “saber” (ERA+, WAR) numbers dont look great. Mussina and Schilling were far superior players and deserve it more than if, if they even deserve it

I agree Morris should be left out along with Mussina and Schilling. I will say if you look at Morris career stats at face value they aren’t all that great but his last two years (well last 5) make it even worse. His ERA not including his last two seasons, when he clearly was ineffective, is 3.73. This number is a better indicator of who he was but its better but still not HOF worthy by most peoples standards. It will be interesting to see how CC Sabathia does when eligible, he may end up with a similar profile as Morris but with more Ks .

Mussina and Schilling both belong. Morris does not. It’s not even remotely close. Both Schilling and Mussina were amazing pitchers. Morris was very good but not nearly good enough. If CC can turn in another 2-4 years of 2.5 WAR baseball he should be a shoo-in. Right now he’s a borderline candidate IMO.

The sad part when it is talked about that voters need more than 10 votes per person is that only 84% of the votes were submitted. 917 votes could have been put to use in helping to elect more players or keeping players eligible for future ballots.

Mussina’s a weird case because he’d have the 2nd highest ERA of anyone in the Hall of Fame if he were elected (Red Ruffing). But when you consider the era he pitched in, the division and the ballparks, he was a lot better than that 3.68 number would indicate.

WAR is technically one statistic but it’s not like saying we should only look at Mussina’s K’s or Wins. WAR takes into account multiple statistics in order to create an overall value. It isn’t perfect but it is much, much better than the typical W/L or ERA argument.

Excellent class of Hall of Famers. Proves that despite the steroids controversy that the same era still had great players who are worthy. And we may see three more starting pitchers elected next year at the earliest.

Is it possible that those 16 ballots Maddux was left off of were those of voters who knew he’d get in and wanted to use their votes elsewhere to keep a larger variety of players on the ballot or try to get them in?

One ballot we know was from a voter who voted for Morris only, claiming anyone who played in the steroids era was tainted. Of course, Morris’ career including parts of the steroid era, but this gentleman had a selective memory.

Not what I meant. The writer wanted to make a statement that if you played in the steroids era, you were guilty, even if there was no credible evidence. Well, that’s a position that has some consistency, I suppose, although it’s pretty unfair to the clean players. But steroids/PEDS have been around since the late 70’s, so why give Morris a free pass? I’m not suggesting he juiced at all. But I doubt Maddux or Glavine did either. The writer has apparently decided he will no longer vote for the HOF

The most interesting number there was the 4.4% that Palmiero got. That bumps him from future ballots. He will be left to the mercies, such as they are, of the Vet’s Committee many years from now. He’s the first real victim of the PED Era. The other prominent accused juicers: Bonds, Clemens, Sosa, McGwire are still on the ballot and will continue to have a chance as baseball history is adapted to deal with PEDs. But Raffy is done. Interesting justice for a man who waved his finger.

The hypocritical sports writers have lost all credibility, 16 voters snubbed Maddux. A Hall of Fame without Bonds and Clemens, who by they way never failed a test and were acquitted in court, is a joke. These are the same guys who looked the other way when Big Mac and Sammy were bombing the ball over the fences. Anyone who didn’t vote for Maddux should lose their vote. It’s time to put the best players in the Hall, players like Shoeless Joe, Pete, and all others who were the best in their time period.

I’d say these writers weren’t turning their backs – they were right there in the press box and writing articles about how it was the most exciting summer in baseball history and was exactly what was needed after the 94 strike. The only people more hypocritical than the writers are MLB executives and owners…

The press wrote about McGwire and andro in the summer of ’98, but the public at large didn’t care and definitely didn’t vilify them because they were still producing. After their careers were over, people went back and said that they were cheaters and don’t deserve the HOF. Without McGwire and Sosa, baseball would never have made the comeback it did after the strike and they deserve recognition for that no matter what. Without them (and Cal Ripken) in 2013 MLB would be down there with the NHL and MLS in popularity.

the thing about andro back then was that it was a perfectly acceptable supplement you could easily find over the counter. it was just the culture then, just like creatine. people were already calling mcgwire a cheater then, but he kept denying use of steroids, saying that he just used andro. obviously now after he confessed it just confirmed he lied for years and was cheating. i’ll admit that it was fun watching them at the time and they should be credited with helping with bringing back the excitement. but he still cheated and lied.

I agree with that, but my question is if he hadn’t cheated and lied, would baseball have even made it back? It’s the Hall of Fame, not the Hall of Perfection. Without McGwire, Sosa, Bonds, Clemens, Raffy, and all the rest…we might not be talking about this right now. We might actually be following *gasp* basketball.

I’m surprised that Craig Biggio didn’t get in this year. He will likely get in next year, along with Pedro Martinez. (Randy Johnson is also a first-time eligible next year.) Mike Piazza and Jeff Bagwell may get in eventually, but probably not until the latter part of the decade.

HOF is a sham w/out guys like Bonds, Clemens, Sosa, McGwire et al going in. Might as well just put a closed sign on the doors b/c you can insinuate that every player from the last 20+ years was on something.

Not sure how the voters saw Thomas as a lock and Piazza as having to wait three years. Their average seasons are near identical, with Thomas playing the easiest position in the game and Piazza playing the hardest. Trying to figure out why the greatest hitting catcher ever to play the game is being snubbed by nearly 40% of the voters, and worse, 20% that thought he was more deserving than Piazza.

Thomas is tied for 18th all time in HR, is 14th all time in OPS, 11th all time in walks, has a career .419 OBP vs Piazza’s .377, has a career .555 SLG% vs Piazza’s still great .545, Thomas has 2 league MVP’s and arguably should have won a third in 2000, Thomas was one of the most outspoken critics of ped users and called for stronger testing throughout his career. It’s the widely suspected PED usage that is killing Piazza’s chances

So, you’re saying because Thomas was outspoken against PED use he didn’t do it? Right. You know you else said they didn’t use? Every other player right before they tested positive. If Piazza is suspected and never failed a drug test, why is Thomas not a suspect? Go further, why not Glavine or Maddux? If Piazza is a suspect then every player who succeeded during the steroid era needs to be.
Also, from a statically stand point, it’s much more impressive to hit 427 as a catcher then 521 as a DH. Being the greatest hitting catcher of All-Time is much more impressive then being the greatest hitting DH of all time. Especially when the numbers are similar.

Thomas was outspoken against ped testing and usage long before the league did anything about it. Piazza going from a 62nd round pick to such a feared slugger raises skepticism as well. Back acne, admitting to use of substances later banned by the MLB, and mutliple sources of anecdotal evidence don’t send a positive message to hall of fame voters that he was clean. Also, if you want to use the catcher argument, Piazza was awful behind the plate and would certainly be a 1B/DH had he been in the American League.

I always hate when people say Piazza wasn’t a good catcher. He didn’t have a good arm. There’s a big difference. Plus, pitchers pitched better with him behind the plate then other catchers and he didn’t allow many passed balls. He was a good catcher was a bad arm. And Thomas is not easily better, he just played longer. If you look at their average season they are very similar, Thomas with the slight edge.
And I suspect Thomas of being a PED user, because why not? If you suspect Piazza off the grounds that he was a good hitter during the steroid era but never failed any drug test, why is Thomas not thought of in the same light?

Frank Thomas is 14th all time in career OPS, Piazza is 47th. Nobody has connected Thomas to peds usage and he was the only player to voluntarily comply with the mitchell investigation. Thomas is 11th all time in walks, 20th all time in OBP (piazza is 199th), Thomas is 22nd all time in slg%, piazza is 30th

First of all, Piazza admitted to using androstenedione, which is a steroid and banned from baseball. Not to mention an ex-ball player named Reggie Jefferson said he knows for a fact Pizza was a PED user throughout his career (same source supplied both of them). Secondly, he was horrible as a defensive catcher. He finished 1st 4 times in his career with the most errors by a catcher in a season and finished in the bottom five 9 times out fo the 12 years he played behind the plate. You all ready addressed his inability to throw anyone out as well.
The reason Thomas isn’t lumped in with the rest is because he looked the same when he came into baseball as when he left (he played football at Auburn with Bo Jackson and was a huge football prospect coming out of HS). So he was simply just a big powerful guy. He was also outspoken against PED’s and steroids way before the whole Sosa/McGuire stuff happened. He always felt baseball should be testing players.

Jeff Kent > Craig Biggio. His stats compiled in 14.18 full seasons vs. 17.59 seasons. Kent had a lot More HR, RBI, better AVG, SLG, and OPS and if you gave him the same amount of time played he’d factor out to 8 less Hits and 31 more 2Bs and ggiven 3+ more seasons he’d be even further ahead in HRs and RBIs.

There is no valid argument to be made against Greg Maddux getting 100% of the vote. Of course, I said the same thing about Rickey Henderson years back as well. HoF voting loses its credibility more every year.